ComicCritics.com : A webcomic about comics » Bloghttp://comiccritics.com
Saving the world from bad comics. One rant at a time!Tue, 25 Jun 2013 06:29:58 +0000en-UShourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.1Hiatus – 6/24/13http://comiccritics.com/2013/06/24/hiatus-62413/
http://comiccritics.com/2013/06/24/hiatus-62413/#commentsMon, 24 Jun 2013 22:38:49 +0000http://comiccritics.com/?p=1285Sorry about that, everyone, I meant to have this blog post ready to coincide with the comic going up, but I ran into some internet problems. And then, kinda…fell asleep.

But no point in burying the lead any longer; Comic Critics is indeed going on hiatus. Right now we’re thinking something like a year, but it’s a “loose” year. Maybe a little less, maybe a little more, sorta depends how it goes.

You’ve no doubt noticed the comic has been updated less frequently in recent months. Just a result of real life getting in the way for both of us. And squeezing in the time to publish the twice-a-month we’ve been managing has sorta reduced the whole thing to a grind, leading to a bit of burnout. Long story short, it was tough to carve out time for the comic even when it was brand-new and we were super into it, and it’s just become that much tougher 5 years later. So we’re taking a step back, letting the creative batteries recharge a little, working on things with less of a time crunch in the meantime. The CC site will stay up for the archive, and we’ll also update the blog with any projects we find ourselves taking on. One of which may very well be a Comic Critics OGN we’ve been toying with for a while. (And feel free to yak at us on Twitter at either @ComicCritics or @SeanWhitmore…they’re kinda like the web comic, but with less text and no pictures)

For now, we just want to thank you all for reading, those of you who’ve been here from the beginning and those of you who discovered us somewhere along the way. And even those of you who didn’t discover us until after reading this! You’ve made everything worth it, because Brandon lives to entertain, and my soul is actually a black hole that feeds on adulation the way that Galactus feeds on worlds. Where even is Galactus, anyway? I haven’t seen him since…ah, never mind, I’m going off on a tangent.

One way or another, Comic Critics will be back, so we’ll see you then!

]]>http://comiccritics.com/2013/06/24/hiatus-62413/feed/13Mini-Reviews from @JoshCritichttp://comiccritics.com/2013/04/03/mini-reviews-from-joshcritic/
http://comiccritics.com/2013/04/03/mini-reviews-from-joshcritic/#commentsWed, 03 Apr 2013 11:53:20 +0000http://comiccritics.com/?p=1251Guardians of the Galaxy #1:
Or, as people who know how to count might like to consider it, “Guardians of the Galaxy #2.” Amazingly, this “first” issue actually hits the ground running. As a Bendis/McNiven joint on its own terms, it’s not bad, if a little slight. But the real selling point of this new GotG series, to my mind, is the early look at what the Marvel movie cosmic stuff will feel like.

Cause think about it; this is the first time Marvel’s been able to take a property with nothing currently invested in it and make it resemble the movieverse before the movie’s even come out. Just as a minor for-instance: check out the “Council of Galactic Empires”. We’ve seen this kind of thing a lot, but not with this lineup. Right off the bat, Spartax–which has been about as relevant to the MU in recent years as the planet Melmac–now has a front-row seat. Star-Lord even refers to his father as “king of the galaxy”. He’s being flippant, but the issue makes it seem like it’s not that far off. The Brood are also present, which is weird. I can’t imagine, say, the United Federation of Planets ever inviting Xenomorphs to their club. And then there’s Annihilus, who should not only be at the top of every planet’s hit list, but isn’t even technically part of our galaxy. All of which means little except to reinforce my point that Marvel obviously views their cosmic mythology as particularly malleable. If nothing else, I’d wager Spartax will be a major cosmic player in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, akin to the role the Shi’ar usually play.

G.I. Joe #1:
Well, I gave it a look because the movie’s coming out. And that right there should tell you I deserved whatever I got. It wasn’t terrible, but I lost patience with the “GI Joe by way of Youngblood” concept real quick. I mean, like, Page 3 quick. And while someone may have used that “famous/infamous” line before Jonah Jameson, it’s his now, by god. It felt hollow at the end of this. And there isn’t much beyond that. Duke and Shipwreck had a couple good lines. The Sunbow jokes felt forced. Hashtag is ridiculous. The end.

Superior Spider-Man #2-4:
I wonder what it says that I’m finding myself liking Doc Ock as Spider-Man more than Peter. First of all, it’s entertaining as hell to see him react to everything with two different, conflicting sets of memories. Secondly, nearly everything Ghost Peter has been chiding Otto about has made him sound like a ridiculous child.

Uncanny X-Men #2:
I liked it better than the first issue. Bendis’ characterization of Scott and Emma is better than I’d feared. My biggest fear remains Bendis unilaterally deciding, “Hey, Cyclops is crazy. He was totally crazy THE WHOLE TIME, you guys!”

Batman Incorporated #8:
Holy shit, Bat-Cow is gonna be PIIIIIIIISSED.

Batman #17:
Goddamn. That’s how you end a good Joker story right there.

]]>http://comiccritics.com/2013/04/03/mini-reviews-from-joshcritic/feed/218th time’s the charmhttp://comiccritics.com/2013/04/03/18th-times-the-charm/
http://comiccritics.com/2013/04/03/18th-times-the-charm/#commentsWed, 03 Apr 2013 11:51:11 +0000http://comiccritics.com/?p=1252As much as I hate pushing Brandon’s gorgeous Cyclobama image further down the page, I figure I’ve had a long enough vacation from these blog posts that I stress over even though I know in my heart nobody could possibly care about them.

Our current strip can be taken several different ways, which is something we encourage. I like to think Comic Critics! never goes for the most obvious point of view (whether we do or not, who the hell knows, I just like to think we don’t). But for the most part, it came from a place of just really wanting to point out how insane DC has been lately. Like, dangerously insane. Like, if DC was a person it would need to be locked up in Creedmoor before it wandered naked into the middle of the Macy’s Day Parade and started fucking the big Underdog balloon.

And I know what you’re thinking, “What do you mean ‘lately’?” But seriously, just look at their track record since the New 52 reboot, and you’d think DC actually stopped trying to run a legitimate comic book company and has been filming a This is Spinal Tap-like mockumentary for the past year. Solicited creators being kicked off books before they even came out, scores of creators quitting over editorial interference (some of them almost immediately), a very public series of accusations by Rob Liefeld, a heckuva lot of cancellations, the firing-and-immediate-rehiring of Gail Simone….

I almost can’t wait to see what wacky thing happens next. Anyone care to take any action on this? I’ll lay odds that it’ll have something to do with Stephanie Brown again, like someone will erase her from a Greg Capullo flashback montage and replace her with a crudely drawn Bette Kane, causing Capullo to leave the book.

]]>http://comiccritics.com/2012/10/21/cyclops-was-right/feed/27/25/2012 – Just pretend I was in a hole for 6 months.http://comiccritics.com/2012/07/25/7252012-just-pretend-i-was-in-a-hole-for-6-months/
http://comiccritics.com/2012/07/25/7252012-just-pretend-i-was-in-a-hole-for-6-months/#commentsWed, 25 Jul 2012 10:27:41 +0000http://comiccritics.com/?p=1157So, I’ve been a bit lax in doing these. I meant to do one about Amazing Spider-Man to go along with that strip, but my review could never decide if it wanted to be focused on the movie itself or on comparing it to the Raimi movie or on reboots in general, so I ran out of steam and let it lapse.

And at that point, Dark Knight Rises was almost upon us, and like most people, I was all “Amazing what?”

Anyway, to sum up: Amazing Spider-Man was decent, did a couple things better than the Raimi movie but overall not as epic. Dark Knight Rises was a fantastic end to the trilogy, but if you haven’t liked Nolan’s take up till now (and I can totally understand why some don’t), it won’t change your mind.

On that note, we chose not to focus on any of the common nitpicks of Nolan’s Batman (his lack of detective skills, his perhaps over-willingness to retire, that goddamn voice) and instead focus on the fans. Not all the fans, mind, just the ones that make discussing the Nolan movies so goddamn annoying. You know the ones. The ones that are a bit too into it. The ones who suck all the fun out of the discussion…and I’m gonna reiterate that part, because it’s vaguely important…the ones who take the FUN OUT of talking about BATMAN.

The idea came after what happened to critic Marshall Fine when he dared to post a negative review of the movie. If it could happen to him, why not previousNolan-critic Marissa?

(And just to preempt any weird suspicions, none of this has anything to do with the tragedy in Colorado. Discussion of that magnitude really has no place in a strip as goofy as ours, or a blog as half-assed as this, except to say that our hearts go out to the victims, and that that guy should already be hanging from the end of a rope by now)

Quotable quotes from @JoshCritic:

“Dark Knight Rises saved a lot of time by adapting Dark Knight Returns, Knightfall, and No Man’s Land all at once. That’s bang for your buck.”

]]>http://comiccritics.com/2012/07/25/7252012-just-pretend-i-was-in-a-hole-for-6-months/feed/56/21/2012 – In Europe, the name of this strip has to be “HT”.http://comiccritics.com/2012/06/21/6212012-in-europe-the-name-of-this-strip-has-to-be-ht/
http://comiccritics.com/2012/06/21/6212012-in-europe-the-name-of-this-strip-has-to-be-ht/#commentsFri, 22 Jun 2012 06:55:25 +0000http://comiccritics.com/?p=1135Man, GI Joe, World War Z, AND Ninja Turtles all getting pushed back? How’s that Paramount stock looking, guys?

(No, seriously, I’m asking. Google is being extremely unhelpful in the matter)

Like with GI Joe, there are several variations of the story floating around. Some report that the script isn’t up to snuff, others report that it just needs to be made less expensive to shoot, and some even say the thing’s been shelved indefinitely. And the only thing all those stories have in common is I don’t care about any of them. Or the movie. Or even Michael Bay making them aliens. Don’t get me wrong, I still think it’s dumb (for the same reason as Josh), I just…don’t care.

And I like the Turtles, I guess I’m just…satisfied with the amount of Turtle material we’ve already gotten? It sounds weird, I know, but I think I am. I loved the first two movies, I loved the Fox cartoon, I loved the Archie comics, and I loved the original comics (well, mostly…they got weird after the creators left). I even liked that weirdly-plotted CGI movie from a few years ago. And while the 80s cartoon as a whole does not hold up well, the first season and a half was pretty good.

Maybe it’s just reboot fatigue. I’d be a lot less apathetic if I thought a movie might have the Turtles meeting guys like Leatherhead, Slash, Armaggon, Man-Ray, Metalhead, or Wingnut & Screwloose. Or fight in the Intergalactic Wrestling circuit. Or team up with Cerebus or Usagi Yojimbo…okay, now we’re entering pipe-dream territory. But for them to be meeting April O’Neil and the Shredder again? Hell, push it back to 2020, maybe then enough time will have passed to make me excited for it again.

Quotable quotes from @JoshCritic:

“Avengers vs X-Men #6: In which the fact that I’m not reading the Iron Fist tie-in stuff in New Avengers comes back to punish me.”

]]>http://comiccritics.com/2012/06/21/6212012-in-europe-the-name-of-this-strip-has-to-be-ht/feed/46/15/2012 – You gotta wonder which Green Lantern pisses off the Midwest more.http://comiccritics.com/2012/06/15/6152012-you-gotta-wonder-which-green-lantern-pisses-off-the-midwest-more/
http://comiccritics.com/2012/06/15/6152012-you-gotta-wonder-which-green-lantern-pisses-off-the-midwest-more/#commentsSat, 16 Jun 2012 06:53:36 +0000http://comiccritics.com/?p=1122My favorite thing about the kerfuffle surrounding the mystery GL being teased in Green Lantern #0 is how it’s begun to feed on itself. The first wave of responders criticized DC’s racial insensitivity in introducing a new Muslim character with a gun and what looks like a ski mask. And then the second wave of responders criticized the first wave’s racial insensitivity in immediately assuming any dark-skinned character with a gun is inherently a thug.

I will say this, though. I haven’t given the image of the new GL a LOT of thought, but every thought I have given it centers on how ludicrously out of place the gun is. The people pointing out that other comic characters use guns are missing the point spectacularly, as those other characters generally do not have the “most powerful weapon in the universe” (direct quote from about 64% of all GL stories ever written) sitting snugly on their finger. War Machine has guns built into his armor, he’s not holding a gat.

(And if he ever was holding one, you can be damn sure he wouldn’t be holding it at an angle. Because, in the immortal words of the Punisher, “they put the sights on top for a reason.”)

Maybe it’ll turn out that there’s a great in-story reason for the gun, like it’s a badass space gun that shoots space bullets and fucks up space monsters. Or maybe it’s just got some connection to #0’s story and makes zero appearance afterward. I dunno. But that’s kind of irrelevant right now, since all we have to go on is this one image. Which is why you’ve gotta put a lot of thought into such images. Minus the gun, nobody’s having this conversation. Hell, even make the gun green and glowing, and we’re probably not having this conversation.

“I can’t wait for the issue where the Guardians have to update the Book of Oa with gun control laws.”

]]>http://comiccritics.com/2012/06/15/6152012-you-gotta-wonder-which-green-lantern-pisses-off-the-midwest-more/feed/56/9/2012 – No, “Faerie” with an “e”, like Neil Gaiman would write it.http://comiccritics.com/2012/06/10/692012-no-faerie-with-an-e-like-neil-gaiman-would-write-it/
http://comiccritics.com/2012/06/10/692012-no-faerie-with-an-e-like-neil-gaiman-would-write-it/#commentsSun, 10 Jun 2012 09:07:55 +0000http://comiccritics.com/?p=1118Someday, someone’s gotta write a comprehensive book about Jim Shooter. During his time as editor-in-chief for Marvel, there’s no denying he had an incredible impact on not just the company, but the entire industry. And depending on who in the industry you ask, this impact was either disastrous or fantastic or some mixture of the two. It’s pretty tough to find someone with real knowledge of the Shooter reign who doesn’t hold pretty strong opinions on the man. (Hell, it’s hard to find someone with hearsay knowledge who doesn’t have an opinion)

This strip goofs on Shooter’s policy of disallowing gay characters in Marvel comics, which resulted in the rewrite of a long-running Alpha Flight sub-plot. Northstar was still officially in the closet in those days, although creator John Byrne and later Alpha Flight writer Bill Mantlo would drop what hints they were allowed to make. Mantlo intended to go a lot further than hints, and over the course of several issues had Northstar suffer from a progressively-worsening sickness that was eventually to have been revealed as AIDS (Because he was gay, you see. Let’s not dwell on the appropriateness of the storyline as planned, lest we stray too far from our point).

Between Shooter’s policy and the Comics Code, the revelation was squelched. A new explanation had to be given for why Northstar was so sick, and Mantlo rose to the challenge by revealing that Northstar was actually part elf (or “fairy”, as it’s commonly told in the retelling. But again, let us not get bogged down by Mantlo and stay on-point). So he was an elf and he was dying of an elf disease and magic saved him and yay it was over. Northstar wouldn’t come out of the closet officially for another, what, 60 issues of Alpha Flight?

Some people take this and other instances (Google “Hulk” and “YMCA” and see what you find) as evidence that Shooter had a personal problem with homosexuality. I dunno, I think it’s just as likely he was afraid to go up against the Code or that allowing gay characters would lead to controversy that cost them readers. But the thing it, the reason why is largely irrelevant. If you’re the guy making the edict that _____ group is not allowed to appear in your company’s product, then whatever the reasoning behind it, you’re the guy who gets to hold the shit-bucket for as long as people care to recount it.

Quotable quotes from @JoshCritic:

“Before Marvel made an announcement about Northstar’s marriage, they should have made one reminding everyone he was still with the X-Men.”

]]>http://comiccritics.com/2012/06/10/692012-no-faerie-with-an-e-like-neil-gaiman-would-write-it/feed/46/5/2012 – Leave the “vulnerable to wood” jokes to Kevin Smith’s crew.http://comiccritics.com/2012/06/05/652012-leave-the-vulnerable-to-wood-jokes-to-kevin-smiths-crew/
http://comiccritics.com/2012/06/05/652012-leave-the-vulnerable-to-wood-jokes-to-kevin-smiths-crew/#commentsTue, 05 Jun 2012 11:32:52 +0000http://comiccritics.com/?p=1110I can’t take credit for this one; the “Rainbow Lantern” line came from my girlfriend. And she doesn’t even read comics, so that she thought of it before me just goes to show how out of it I’ve been lately.

Prior to that, we didn’t have any plan to mention the Alan Scott thing at all. I didn’t have anything particularly insightful to add, and I really wanted to avoid the increasingly tired formula of “prejudiced guy says something ignorant and our wise and evolved hero points out why he’s wrong”. I’m not saying we’ve never gone to that well (though we have always tried to add a little twist to the exercise), just that I’m conscious about not repeating it at every opportunity.

I’m kind of interested to check out Earth 2 now, where I wasn’t before. I mean…James Robinson has NOT had a great track record for, like, a little while now. But I like his approach to this change. It was precipitated by the realization that de-aging the JSA would remove one of DC’s existing gay characters from canon: Alan’s son, Obsidian. So why not balance the scales and make Alan gay? And when asked if Robinson would be writing this version of Alan any differen, his response has been simply, “No. He’s attracted to men, and that’s the only difference.” That appeals to me, as does the knowledge that Alan won’t just be “the gay one” on the team, swallowed back into the roster when nobody has a particular use for him. (Northstar, I’m staring a hole right through you) No, he’s the square-jawed leader of this world’s premiere superhero team, and possibly the most powerful mortal on the planet. That’ll certainly make those “Gay Superheroes in Comics” lists less of a lame read.

Of course, anyone put off by DC’s “Look at us! Look at us!” patting-themselves-on-the-back parade, it’s hard to blame you. Promotion is one thing, but it’s not terribly classy to be THAT proud of yourself for doing the right thing. Act like you’ve been there before, y’know?

Quotable quotes from @JoshCritic:

“Wonder if the mainstream news is more surprised about the original Green Lantern being gay or about there being more than one Green Lantern.”

]]>http://comiccritics.com/2012/06/05/652012-leave-the-vulnerable-to-wood-jokes-to-kevin-smiths-crew/feed/05/27/2012 – No, Joe!http://comiccritics.com/2012/05/28/5272012-no-joe/
http://comiccritics.com/2012/05/28/5272012-no-joe/#commentsMon, 28 May 2012 12:05:31 +0000http://comiccritics.com/?p=1102For those of you not interested in modern reincarnations of cartoons from the 1980s that were created to sell toys…and really, how can I blame you?…this will all be painfully uninteresting to you. Tune out now and check back next week, where we’ll return to the more socially-acceptable subject of men with their underwear on the outside.

Like our imaginary executive says, the G.I. Joe sequel, originally scheduled to come out in June, has been pushed back to March. Ostensibly, to convert the film to 3D. That’s all we’ve gotten officially, and it feels like a pretty weak excuse. Not leastwise because they specifically had that conversation with their director before the start of shooting, and they apparently decided it wasn’t worth the extra cost. Well, you say, maybe converting it to 3D after the fact was cheap enough for them to change their minds. Okay, fine, but what about the cost of that Superbowl commercial of theirs, which has now essentially been rendered useless? That’s a hell of an expense tossed out the window for a whim.

The most prevalent theory floating around is that the studio simply feared its competition. They didn’t put all this time and money into a movie so they could open in the shadow of The Avengers and then be immediately knocked out of the public eye by the one-two punch of Amazing Spider-Man and The Dark Knight Rises. And fair enough, but again…why wait until so late in the game to realize it? It didn’t occur to them that these movies would probably be monster hits? How could I know that and they didn’t?

Speaking of things that we all knew and the professionals didn’t, others think that it was the disappointing returns for Battleship that made everyone nervous about releasing another Hasbro-toy-based property so soon. And I don’t even have to point out the obvious flaw in that reasoning, but I will: you can’t compare anything else to a Battleship movie because nothing is stupider than a Battleship movie. If the people who green-lit that project had any friends, those friends would have used those exact same words. “Nothing is stupider than a Battleship movie.”

And why not simply delay Retaliation till August? Or hell, anytime this year, to take advantage of whatever buzz they’ve already generated up till this point (which will almost completely evaporate and have to be rebuilt in 2013) and so the merchandise can be pushed through the holiday season? Well, the reason for that one might have something to do with the confirmed reshoots and the reaction to test screenings. It could just be that the movie isn’t very good, and needs some extensive work to turn it into something that’ll make ANY money. Which, frankly, makes me wonder where all these discerning test-screening audiences were during that brainwashed Baroness bullshit from the first movie.

End of the day, it could very well be that delaying Retaliation was the smartest move Paramount/Hasbro could make under the circumstances. But even if that’s true, they’re only IN those circumstances due to a series of poor decisions that led them there. And even if the movie performs decently come March, it won’t change the losses Hasbro specifically will suffer as a result of jerking around the retailers who’ve been discounting merchandise to clear space for toys that aren’t coming anytime soon, or cancelling their popular animated series for the sole purpose of not conflicting with the movie. This all can be (and has been) spun a hundred different ways, and I’m all for remaining optimistic, but I think no matter how you slice it, that this officially counts as a screw-up. Even if we don’t know exactly at what point along the path it occurred.